This dissertation examines the emergence, evolution, and realization of Swedish urban policy from 1988 to 2023 through a conjunctural analysis. It explores the contradiction between uneven spatial development and the pursuit of a hegemonic order, wherein the (re)production of sociospatial inequalities continually challenges the conditions necessary for hegemony. Urban policy is conceptualized as a hegemonic project aimed at regulating these tensions by producing consent in marginalized areas through various practices and technologies.

Methodologically, the conjunctural analysis employed in this study aligns with a ”historical and structural” ethnographic approach, incorporating policy documents, government reports, evaluations, and elite interviews. The study design spans multiple temporalities and contexts to trace the evolution of urban policy. Additionally, counter-hegemonic projects are identified to illuminate key tensions and forms of resistance. Periodization serves as an analytical strategy, delineating shifts in urban policy into four phases: condensation, consolidation, fragmentation, and revanchism. Over time, Swedish urban policy has assumed an increasingly repressive character, with the production of consent becoming more coercive.

The study identifies four primary modalities through which consent is produced in urban policy: (1) representation of urban problems and hegemonic visions, (2) governance through diverse policy instruments and arrangements, (3) activation of surplus populations via labor market measures, and (4) incorporation of marginalized groups through democratic initiatives and participatory innovations.

The dissertation concludes with a critical analysis of two structural contradictions impeding a more socially just urban policy: hegemony without economy and democracy without hegemony. The former highlights the absence of an ”economic nucleus” capable of redistributing the value generated within the urban political economy, exacerbating economic inequality. The latter reveals how urban policy initiatives designed to incorporate marginalized groups have been implemented through top-down institutional frameworks lacking a robust social base. This contradiction highlights a persistent tension between form and substance within liberal democracies, resulting in limited consent and constrained prospects for transformative change. Addressing these contradictions is essential for advancing a more socially just urban policy framework.